tv U.S. House of Representatives Morning Hour CSPAN January 7, 2016 10:00am-12:01pm EST
guest: i am looking very closely at what iran and saudi arabia are saying. i'm not expecting a major confrontation, but i want to see if they are trying to escalate or the escalate. .ost: greg myre that is it for our program, we will see you tomorrow. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c. january 7, 2016. i hereby appoint the honorable darren lahood to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2015, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour ebate. -- january 5, 2016, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority
and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip but in o five minutes no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri, mr. brooks, for five minutes. -- rooks: the speaker pro tempore: sorry. labama for five minutes. mr. brooks: mr. speaker, washington has once again undermined and betrayed struggling american workers who seek jobs to pay enough to support their families. in december, on less than 72 hours' notice, congress and president obama shoved down the throats of americans a 2,000-page financially irresponsible $1.1 trillion
omnibus spending bill that not only risked america's solvency, it also threatens american jobs for american workers. h-2-b ld law, 66,000 foreign worker visas could be issued each year. buried deep in the omnibus bill on page 701 is an obscure provision without even a heading that, according to a labor expert, increases available h-2-b visas up to 264,000 per year. effectively quadrupling visas for low-skilled temporary nonagriculture farm workers. making americans worse, on new year's eve, while america focused on football bowl games and celebrations, president obama issued a 200-page proposed rule to illegally bust statutory green card immigration caps by approving
unlimited numbers of work permits for foreigners who don't have green cards. this white house action is yet another brazen display of contempt for immigration statutes, the rule of law and american workers. the white house argues importing foreign labor is necessary because of a claimed shortage of american labor. similarly, house speaker paul ryan claims increasing foreign worker visas, quote, helps small businesses who cannot find labor when there's a surge in demand for labor like seafood processing or tourism, end quote. this claimed labor shortage is unsupported by jobs or wage data and is political bunk. er federal labor statistics, 57%, 57% of americans without a high school diploma had no job in 2015's second quarter.
that bears repeating. 57% of americans without a high school diploma had no job in 2015's second quarter. that's a lot of americans who would love to have those jobs. president obama and congress denied americans and gave to foreigners. economics 101 explains wages rise if there is a labor shortage and fall if there is a labor surplus. according to census bureau data from 2007 to 2014, wages for security guards went down 6.1%. for cooks, down 4.4%. for janitors, down 1.2%. for ushers, lobby attendants and ticket takers, down 7.1%. for hotel, motel and resort desk clerks, down 7%. the list of falling wages for low-income american workers goes on and on.
this falling wage data is compelling evidence that there is no shortage of american labor and to the contrary that there is an oversupply of american labor that demands cutting foreign labor, not expanding it. mr. speaker, while these surges in foreign worker visas and foreign labor work permits is a huge victory for special interests that profit from suppressed wages, it is a debilitating loss for struggling american families. unemployed and underpaid americans desperate for a good-paying job have every right to be angry at federal -- at a federal government that takes american jobs from american citizens and gives them to foreigners. americans have every right to be angry at washington elected officials who care more about special interest campaign contributions than american voters who elected us. i hope these americans will remember their anger during
2006's primary and general elections. that -- 2016's primary and general elections. that is a way to force washington to represent us. mr. speaker, i can't speak for anybody else, but as for me, mo brooks from alabama's fifth congressional district, i fight for the economic interest of american citizens and against policies that undermine the struggling american voters who sent us here. that's part of the reason why i voted against december's financially irresponsible omnibus spending bill and am proud of it. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker. with the odd drama playing out in oregon where armed thugs have taken over a federal wildlife facility, it's important to reflect on what the wildlife refuge system is all about. if these people had any
argument with the president, it was with president roosevelt who 108 years ago established the national wildlife refuge as a response to protect national resources, especially the slaughter of wild birds for feathers to adorn women's hats. it's ironic the president, who in his younger days, was part of the slaughter of the buffalo in a magnificent ecosystem. he realized the necessity of protecting these resources. today we benefit from the foresight of this conservation president who provided the cornerstone of environmental protection that enriches us all. the notion that somehow this is a wild west where people can do with public land what they want is thoroughly discredited. this mindset from the 1800's that there were endless wide open spaces people could do what they wished, when they wished, where they wished is tinged with regret and tragedy.
we took away the land from native americans that our government had given to them in solemn treaty ratified by congress. the mindset that public lands were to be exploited as rapidly as possible is still embodied in the mining act of 1872, which essentially allows anyone, including foreign mining operations, to exploit our country's mineral resources at basically no cost and with no enforceable obligation to repair the damage they inflicted. the west is now blighted with thousands of abandoned mines, oil and gas wells that will risk being a permanent scar on the landscape. while private profit was pursued, the public is left with the consequences and the costs of cleanup if it ever occurs. the long-standing battles over american range land between owners and between
competing uses, like cattle and sheep, were not pretty. there's no doubt there are still significant problems dealing with public land management in part because the rules of the game are still set by that mining act of 1872 and the tailored grazing act of 1934. all but the most reckless individuals would agree that statutes written today would look fundamentally different with more protections and clarity. it was in this void that teddy roosevelt stepped, declaring critical national monuments. he established wildlife refuges to benefit countless generations to come. these amazing treasures are not just scenic wonders. they hold extraordinarily valuable habitat for wildlife, wild waterfowl, helping preserve the land and water and the ecosystem that goes far beyond what is simply spectacular to look at. this is america's heritage. we struggle on an ongoing basis to recover from the reckless, thoughtless exploitation of the
last two centuries. the vast majority of the american public supports this effort. even if they never visit the remote western regions. indeed, the fact they are often inaccessible is one of the ways they are preserved. imagine tour buses, motorized vehicles, hordes of tourists in their infrastructure and litter and the destructive effects that would have. the side show with the wildlife refuge on secures a much larger and important public policy. protecting our heritage, enhancing it and avoiding reckless behavior of a few that will penalize generations to come. that's why the harney basin wetlands initiative of people in that region facilitated by the refuge between 2010 and 2013 was a textbook example of collaboration where all the stakeholders created a vision and a 20-year plan for the refuge and the surrounding
landscape, including the biggest wetland restoration project ever undertaken. it would be valuable for us to look behind the headlines at the facts on the ground, the history of the resource, the struggle for protection and the tremendous benefits for all americans. and what the stakeholders in that region accomplished together. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, for five minutes. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. yesterday i was proud to vote in favor of the restoring americans healthcare freedom reconciliation act, which repeals the affordable care act, or the a.c.a. with yesterday's passage of the bill, it marks the first time repeal of the a.c.a. has been sent to president obama's desk. in the past year, several significant problems with this
law become ever more clear. we've seen a large number of health care co-ops go under. and one major health care provider, united health care, announced it's pulling out of the a.c.a. exchange. this system is just not sustainable. late last year, the congressional budget office released a report stating that the a.c.a. will lead to a reduction of work hours equivalent to two million jobs over the next decade. the c.b.o. acontributes this reduction to health care subsidies tied to income, raising effective tax rates for americans and creating a people seeking for promotions or new higher paying jobs. excuse me. it also points to higher taxes and penalties as a reason for the reduction in work hours. in comparison, the restoring americans healthcare freedom conciliation act will reduce the federal deficit by more than a half a trillion dollars over the next 10 years. it will also eliminate costly provisions, such as the
individual and employer health insurance coverage mandates. the cadillac tax on high-cost plans and it will enhance the solvency of medicare. it also ensures that federal tax dollars will not go to providers of abortion. mr. speaker, over the past several years, dozens of a.c.a. reforms have been signed into law. however, we have only scratched the surface when it comes to addressing problems with this law. it is time to come together to support a comprehensive approach that ensures responsible use of taxpayer dollars and fixes the issues affecting our nation's health care system. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, for five minutes. mr. mcgovern: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i am -- today i'm honored to share the story of the haymark cafe started by brothers peter and david simpson in north hampton, massachusetts.
mr. speaker, one of the surest signs of a vibrant local community is a lively restaurant scene. you know a town or a region is humming economically when you have a wide variety of restaurants to choose from. it's a sign that people have enough money left over after paying off their bills to spend on treating themselves and their families. it's a strong indication that people feel secure in the direction of the economy. but for millions of low-wage workers across the country, the story is more complicated than that and the picture is not all that pretty. for all the economic vibrancy associated with restaurant culture and though restaurants employ almost one in 10 private sector workers, restaurant workers are among the worst paid, worst treated within the economy as a whole. while nonrestaurant private sector workers make a median hourly wage of $18, restaurant workers earn a meanian hourly wage of $10. -- median hourly wage of $10
including tips. more than 16% of restaurant workers live below the poverty line. and it is skewed along race and gender lines. the highest paid positions in restaurants tend to be held by men and people who are white while the lowest paid positions are paid to women and people of color. and undocumented workers comprise over 15% of the restaurant work force, more than twice the rate for nonrestaurant sectors. there are forward thinking restaurant owners who are choosing the highroad. restaurants where conscious efforts are made to break down gender and ethnic divisions and choose to pay a living wage with good benefits. if you ask them, the owners of these establishments will tell you that they choose this path because it's not only the right thing to do, it's also the smart thing to do financially. they choose this path because it's a solid business model that improves the chances of awk sess in a highly competitive
industry. i am proud to represent one of those restaurants in my district. the hey market cafe in north hampton, massachusetts, has led the way for almost a quarter century in treating its employees with respect and paying them a living wage. i attended an event a couple weeks ago at the hey market cafe where the owner, peter simpson, announced that his restaurant was moving to a $15 per hour minimum wage and would be eliminating tips. i have known peter for a long time, and i wasn't surprised that he would take such a step. peter opened the hey market with his brother almost 25 years ago. from the beginning, they were committed to paying a fair wage and creating a positive work environment for their employees. ut in talking to peter i realized his decision, while it reflected his idealism, was rooted in hard-nosed business sense. you don't survive and thrive for a quarter century in the highly competitive rest rapt industry, especially in a small community
like north hampton, if your business model isn't airtight. every decision you make has to make sense financially to succeed and stay competitive. so the decision to go to a $15 per hour minimum wage and eliminate tips was not something peter took lightly. he did his home work. he looked at other restaurants in other cities that made a similar move. he talked to his employees. he worked closely with the pioneer valley workers center which is leading the charge to better the lives of low-wage immigrant workers in western massachusetts. eliminating tips allowed peter make the wages better -- the wages between better paid waiters and less well paid kitchen staff more equitable. it allowed his wait staff to earn a wage they could count on rather than having to depend on the tipping whims of customers. it also gave him increased staffing flexibility. he could train all his staff to do all jobs so he could more easily shift people around when necessary. in committing to a $15 per hour minimum wage, peter also
increased staff loyalty while decreasing turnover and training costs. as a result of peter's bold decision, the hey market cafe has been overwhelmed by an outpouring of support. staff and customers are equally enthusiastic and businesses jumped. this commit itment to wage equity has shown once again to be a sound business strategy and a business based on such principle can provide a decent living for its staff and contribute to the economic health of the community. mr. speaker, the hey market cafe is living proof, especially in an industry with such a dismal track record on wages, that paying a living wage is good for business. that a commitment to wage equity makes financial sense. the restaurant industry can and must do better, and i'm proud to say the hey market cafe is way.ng the i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. b.o.s., for five minutes. -- mr. bost for five minutes.
mr. bost: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the president earlier this week took aim at our second amendment rights. we know his purpose was to restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. it will undermine our personal privacy rights. it will put -- make it to where due process is taken away from many of our citizens. and it won't stop criminals from carrying firearms. as a father and grandfather, my heart is broken for the many tragedies and the attack that is have occurred around this nation. but this won't kur the problem. -- won't cure the problem. mr. speaker, we in this congress must fight for the rights of our constitution. we must also use the courts to fight for those rights. we must do more.
mr. speaker, not only i but you and every member of this congress took an oath of office when we took these positions. we took that oath and it was to uphold and defend the constitution, all of the constitution. not just the first amendment, but the second amendment as well, and every part thereof. mr. speaker, when i took that oath, tyke it very, very seriously. and i'm doing my part. i'm upholding that oath that i took. i believe the president should uphold his. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. butterfield, for five minutes. mr. butterfield: mr. speaker, i rise today to express my condolences on the passing of a giant in the durham, north carolina community.
a trailblazer, one who dedicated her life to improving health outcomes for disadvantaged citizens, including veterans. this trailblazer, mr. speaker, was my friend, dr. sharon elliott bynum. sharon passed away on sunday, january 3, at the young age of 58. two days before her 59th birthday. we lost this giant far too soon, but not before she revolutionized the delivery of care for those in need through the founding of durham's first prestanding comprehensive health care clinic -- freestanding comprehensive health care clinic called healing with care. my first visit as a congressman was a visit there. i saw her at work. i saw dozens of community volunteers, paid staff. we mourn this tremendous loss, but we also celebrate sharon's remarkable life that was replete with the success that many can
only hope to achieve. born in durham, sharon was a graduate of northern high school. durham technical institute, the watts school of nursing, and my alma mater, north carolina central university. she also received a master's degree and ph.d. from victory international college. sharon was a dedicated member of great sorority, delta sigma theta, as a member of the alumni chapter founded in 1931, she led by example. sharon was also a member of the national council of negro women. top ladies of distinction, and many more service organizations. finally, she was a faithful member of faith assembly christian center in durham. dr. elliott bynum was attracted to the field of nursing when she at the age of 16 began volunteering at historic lincoln
community health center. sharon's volunteerism, mr. speaker, motivated her to pursue a nursing career. so in 1995 dr. elliott bynum and her late sister, patricia, pat, she called her, founded healing with care incorporated. what began as a nonprofit community-based provider of services for individuals living with h.i.v. expanded to be the primary health care home for more than 1,000 individuals living with cancer and cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and obesity. care also provides free dental care, substance abuse counseling, a food pantry, and free housing for homeless veterans. her remarkable work has been honored over the years through many awards and recognitions. they include the order of the long leaf pine which is the highest civilian honor presented by the governor. the congressional black caucus
foundation's veterans brain trust award. the nccu distinguished alumni award, and the durham chamber of commerce women's leadership award. dr. elliott bynum's lifetime of tireless work in service to thousands of disadvantaged individuals had an immeasurable impact on the durham community, a grateful community that joins me today in celebrating this life. so i ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our recognition to dr. sharon elliott bynum's two children, ebb any elliott covington, and damian elliott bynum. her beloved brother, joe elliott jr. sisters carolyn hinton and addiemann. her grandson, ahmad. the entire care family. and all those who have been impacted by her extraordinary work. and i may say, mr. speaker, that are f the family members
with us today. so, mr. speaker, in closing, on tomorrow, i will say just a few words at the celebration of life service in durham by making a very plain but profound point and it goes like this, durham, north carolina, is a better place, it is a better place to live and work because of the unselfish service of dr. sharon elliott bynum. may she rest in peace. a life well lived. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. lamalfa, for five minutes. mr. lamalfa: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today in sadness to commemorate the life of mr. lawrence agie, a man i call a friend. he's a long time resident of carthur, california, born in
1937, he operated an institution in the area for many years. 55 years known as the highway garage, which was the smallest, i think, chevrolet dealership in the west. and there was only one for about an 80-mile radius for a lot of years until the reorganization of general motors happened and they took the franchise away. he might have on his inventory of that lot, seven, eight, nine cars, pickups mostly for the farmers and ranchers in the area. it was really an institution to the people of the area. now, when that dealership was on.ed, they continued he and his family. providing service and towing and all other things you would need in that area. i got to know lawrence when i was a new candidate in 2002. striking out from where i live, about 2 1/2 hours away, to go out and meet people in the vast northern california district i represented over the years.
stopped in one day on highway 299, right in macarthur there, and said hi to this tall lanky fell here who -- fellow here who just feels like part of america right there. that struck up a conversation, had a great old time. now he did operate for many, many years a chevrolet dealership, i drove up in my ford. hat starts a little banter going back and forth, especially if you're a partisan nascar fan or automobile brand fan, which kind of tends to go with that. one of the lines i remember him teasing me about is that, well, you know, it's a nice car there, but here we sell the best and service the rest. i guess he probably figured he would have to service my car a lot in the neighborhood. the teasing, banter, was one the great parts of our friendship and relationship. soon after that just every time i would have a chance to go through there, whether it's going up to the inner mountain
fair for a day or two, right there in town, which he was a big part of that institution as well, and hanging out with the people there, he would even -- there is a parade at that fair each year. after i got to know him and his family a little, he let me use his convertible to drive in the parade there. a neat old chevy s.s.r. that was his way to get me into a chevrolet once a year. funny thing, he didn't drive it that much, so people around there got to thinking they would only see it once a year they thought it was my car. it was a funny deal. that just shows his generosity and trust. i know he was well loved in the whole community because during fair time he was a big, big supporter and sponsor of the fair. i don't know if he got to go to it very often because he was always helping people with lock outs, dead batteries, or a tow run. he was helping keep that town together. i know for many of us that are
in and around shasta county there he'll be missed. my heart goes out to his wife and the whole family there because there's a lot happening around highway garage in macarthur there. at fair time you would see a lot of destruction, derby cars, lined up at that place. his son was always working on those. other family members. i think that's the place if you needed a destruction derby car, you see them. they might give you the best technology on that as well. in his service he was nationally recognized as one of the best serving dealers in that dealership. they had up until 2009. until he moved on to service only not selling cars. you can see it on the awards in the shop building. this big wooden building there takes you right back to americana from 80 years ago. i think the dealership was established in 1924. his family took over in 1949.
with the passing of his father in 1959, lawrence took over as the youngest dealer, again, in the west of a chevrolet dealership. he's a volunteer with the macarthur fire department. he was a long time leader of the cloverleaf 4-h for over two decades. member of the fort crook masonic lodge. citizen of the year at least twice. blue ribbon winner. and again a long time supporter of the fair in many capacities. of course he leaves behind a legacy of what small town america is b. middle of the night, there may be a rock in the road or something like that and he would go out and bail them out. one of the times i was up for the fair and leaving town, his he was, coming up in big yellow tow truck. i said, there's lawrence right there.
a rewarding part of this job is getting to know people like him. and you hate it when you have to lose people like that that are pillars of the community but they'll leave a great legacy and proud to have known him. god bless his family. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. sanchez, for five minutes. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, friday marks the 14th anniversary of the enactment of the no child left behind legislation, which when we passed it held so many dreams and so many aspirations for all of us because we believed that our children would get a world-class education out of that. unfortunately, no child left all its potential, fell short. so i think it's important that
we all understand and we all believe in this chamber that through education we lift this nation. it is probably the greatest investment that we can make in the american people. and that's why as lawmakers we have to really work on the best policies for education starting at the national level because we now compete internationally and, of course, at the state and at our local levels right at our school boards. i've been to every single school in my district in orange county, and i've met with teachers and with parents, with administrators, with business had s and they all concerns with the no child left behind. that's why i think the recent passage of the every student
skeds -- succeeds act, or essa, a landmark piece of bipartisan legislation, hopefully will fix the outdated policies of that no child left behind legislation. the new legislation, the new law we just passed takes into consideration the collective criticisms of the teachers and the students and parents and administrators, business leaders, everyone who is involved in the education of our children. the essa has the support of many civil rights groups, teaching groups and community institutions. i'd like to highlight a few of the improvements our parents and students can look forward to with this new law. during the no child left behind era, schools were not held accountable for ensuring that the most disadvantaged students actually were aided and helped
to get an education. the every student succeeds act changes this. it benefits low-income students, minority students, english language learners by requiring the schools to about student data these groups so that we can make better policy for the accountability of how these students learn. states are also required to create exit and entrance exams for english language learners, ensuring they will actually receive attention in these classrooms and will learn. now, mr. speaker, i know that we all think there are way too many tests and that's not the favorite part of the day but the high stakes testing that
was under no child left behind, it left a lot of anxiety campuswide. teachers taught to the test rather than teach that student, the critical learning that must take place in the classroom at an early age. my mom was a teacher. she finally got out because she got tired of teaching to the test. test, test. you know, she had seven kids. they all have masters and ph.d.'s. she was a parent teacher before she went to teach in the classroom, and she knew that students learn in different ways, that not everybody learns he same way, and she would work with students. you know, some students learn verbally. some by test taking. others by acting out plays that get across the idea.
but there was no time in the classroom after no child left behind. it was just one way, the test, the test, the test. i'm proud to say that high-stakes testing under the new law will no longer disadvantage our schools who don't pass those tests. there are going to be other ways, including tests, to decide whether schools and teachers and educators are doing well by our children in the classroom. testing students will not be the end-all for what is happening in the classrooms. schools will have the flexibility to pilot innovative testing measures, allowing more time for learning in the classroom. i'm excited about this new law, mr. speaker, and i hope that we continue to look at it and make sure that every child has a chance in this education system. thank you and i yield back.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. roskam, for five minutes. mr. roskam: thank you, mr. speaker. you know, an interesting thing happened when president obama was elected in 2008. we basically had a national consensus about some elements of health care, and what i mean by that is, most people recognized two things about our health care system that were flawed. first, they recognized that it was too expensive and, second, they recognized that people with a pre-existing condition should be included and not be excluded from an insurance pool. and there was a great deal of consensus around that, and that's where the opportunity was for the obama team to bring the country together around those two core themes. but instead they did something different. instead, they went out on a highly partisan path and that was to create obamacare and we were told that the bill had to be passed in order to
understand what was in it and so forth and so on and we're familiar with the false premises and the false claims and the false narratives about it. do you remember this? we were told that if you liked your doctor, you got to keep your doctor. if you liked your insurance coverage, you got to keep your insurance coverage. your insurance policies, the premiums per familiar a lot were going to drop by over $2,000 a year. none of that turned out to be true. none of it. people lost their coverage. people lost their physicians, their premiums have gone up and so now what has happened is there's been this effort and the effort over the past several years has been met by some mockery by some who say, hey, your efforts to repeal obamacare, how many times are you going to do it? you know how many times we're going to do it? we're going to do it until it gets done and now it's closer than ever. so i have three constituents i want to briefly mention to you.
one is a fellow i connected with on the phone last night. his name is jay. jay told me that notwithstanding the false promises of obamacare, his insurance premiums for his -- him and his daughter have skyrocketed to the point where the amount of anxiety that he was communicating to me on the phone was pal papple. this is not? -- palpable. this is not the false claim of obamacare, but he is fearful of it and he's anxious for his future and the future of his daughter. or how about diane, my other constituent, who's a nine-year breast cancer survivor who was told if you like your doctor you get to keep your doctor until all of a sudden her insurance policy after obamacare kicks her physician out of the group and she doesn't have access to the doctor that has cared for her and kept her cancer free for nine years? or how about the small business owner who i met with on monday in illinois who said, congressman, we would really
like to expand our business. we want to open up a new location. it was a restaurant but if we do it, we've done the math and it's going to cost us $150,000 a year in obamacare payments and we can't afford to expand. and so here's what we got to do. we got to repeal this thing and we've got to replace it and get back to those two core themes that says, let's deal with the underlying cost drivers in health care that make it more expensive than people can afford and we can do that, and let's deal with the pre-existing condition question and we can do that through high-risk pools and other things that don't cost the trillions of obamacare. now, there's an interesting thing that's been happening and that's this. the story of obamacare is shifting. and you ask, well, how is it shifting? it's shifting in this way. it's shifting because we've been told there's no way to undo this. there's no way. it is basically orthodoxy in
our country. it's an entitlement, which it is, and it is so deeply embedded that it's all -- in other words, there's no way to undo this. for a long time it appeared to be true. it appeared to be true because the senate blocked its passage, but now, as we know, the other body is actually -- has actually preceded us in this and through the recognize silling activity, we are now -- reconciliation activity we're now able to join with a majority of the united states house of representatives which i would argue is reflecting a majority of the american public to say, get this thing off our backs. let us flourish. yeah, we can deal with these things. yes, health care needs improving but this thing on our backs is simply smothering us. so here's the opportunity. this will be on president obama's desk.
will he veto it? absolutely. but it's the first time it's ever gotten on his desk before. and what it says is this. that there is only one office between us and the repeal of obamacare. one office is between us and the repeal of obamacare and that office changes next november, so in 11 months there is every opportunity for us to see its repeal and ultimately its replacement. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. hahn, for five minutes. ms. hahn: thank you. thank you, mr. speaker. this upcoming monday, the westboro baptist church plans o hold protests outside of rodondo high school in rodondo beach, california. we've seen these protests often at the funerals of our fallen
service men and women. they're known unfortunately for their hateful message, especially against lgbt americans. members of this church believe that america's generation of high schoolers is utterly without hope, and they say that because these young students are promoting accept hans and inclusion of all people -- acceptance and inclusion of all people regardless of whether they're gay or straight. but i couldn't disagree more with their premise of calling these students without hope. i think because these students are promoting acceptance and inclusion of all people, regardless of whether they are gay or straight, are building a future full of hope. i have the utmost faith in the next generation as the future leaders of this nation. of course, no matter how much i disagree with this group, these
individuals should be allowed to exercise their right to protest, and they do have a right to free speech in this country, but the students have those same rights and an inspiring group of rodondo high school students are organizing a peaceful counterprotest on monday. yesterday, i wrote a letter to the members of the school's gay-straight alliance and told them i wished i could be there on monday to protest alongside of them. these students deserve to live in a world where they can be who they are and love whom they choose. in standing up against hate and living a life of acceptance, inclusion and understanding, they are making that world a reality. i know my colleague here, ted lieu, who represents rodondo beach, joins me in saying we are so proud of these students. we're proud of their courage,
eir bravery, their intelligence and skill in standing up for what they know is right and just and being brave enough to organize a counterprotest. i'm going to be in washington, d.c., on monday, but if i were not here i wanted -- i would want to be standing alongside each and every student to show my solidarity with them. instead, let me tell them that i will be there in spirit. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. curbelo, for five minute. mr. curbelo: mr. speaker, i rise to congratulate miami-dade county public schools where the graduation rate recently reached an all-time high of 78.1% for the 2014-2015 academic year.
surpassing the state average of 77.8%. this is a 1.5% growth from last year's rate, marking the highest graduation rate mdcps has achieved since the florida department of education began implementing new standards track graduation figures in the late 1990's. this is a landmark accomplishment considering the major challenges miami's schools face, including high poverty rates and a large population of english language learners. as a former member of the miami-dade county school board, i salute the students, teachers, faculty, and parents for their dedication and for their commitment to excellence. i also want to recognize school board chair hampton, my other and colleagues, superintendent kur bellow, for
their exceptional -- curbelo for their exceptional leadership. i think of them frequently and constantly am reminded how fortunate we are to have them. o the entire mdcps family, thank you. i'm proud to represent you. mr. speaker, on october 24, 2015, monroe county sheriff's deputy josh gordon found himself in a firefight with a robbery suspect on stock identify lan in the florida keys. amid the exchange of gunfire, his bulletproof vest stopped a round of ammunition, ultimately saving his life. if a bullet would have strayed a few inches one way or another, the outcome could have been entirely different. every day men and women in law enforcement put their lives on the line to ensure our safety. incidents such as this shed light on the significance of effective body armor for those who protect us.
officers like deputy gordon are never off duty and we must, in turn, do everything in our power to protect them. to address this, i stand in strong support of h.r. 228, the bulletproof vest partnership grant act of 2015, which extends the grant program for armored vests through fiscal year 2018. i strongly encourage congress to pass this essential legislation and protect the backbone of our nation's domestic defense. mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize miami international airport on their record breaking year in 2015. 44 million passengers passed through this world renowned airport last year, shattering the previous annual record of 40.9 million passengers in 2014. some of the most
dedicated employees in the country who ensure passengers have a pleasant experience on their journey. whether visiting relatives, conducting business, or visiting the abundance of attractions south florida has to offer. tens of thousands of passengers pass-through m.i.a. on a daily basis and i'm proud to recognize an airport that connects so many people throughout the world. i offer my continued support to my friend, m.i.a. director, emilio gonzalez, as his team works in the new year to attract more domestic and international routes. and i know they'll continue to be available at each terminal so all visiting guests can ebb joy the wonderful culture of south florida. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. costa, for five minutes. mr. costa: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. costa: mr. speaker, i rise today to support and stand with the sikh community in the san joaquin valley.
in the past two weeks, two sikh men have been brutally attacked and very sadly one of them was killed. they lost their life. the fresno city police department has labeled these two crimes as potentially hate crimes. sikh ball was attacked in the middle of the street while waiting for a ride so he could go to work. as any average american would do throughout our country. singh gill was killed while working at a local convenience store. both tragic incidentses took place in my district. my thoughts and prayers are with them both and their family and my deepest sympathy and condolences go to them for their loss. the attacks on these american
citizens are an attack on all american citizens who choose to practice their religion and observe their cultural heritage. as americans do, throughout our land. sadly, since september 11, 2001, the sikh community has endured discrimination because of a lack of understanding of sikhism which is based on equality and love. they are not alone. as a nation of immigrants, we must remember we have an opportunity to learn and benefit from the thousands of different cultures that is part of the mosaic of what makes america great. after all, we are a nation of immigrants, both past and present. and we must never, ever forget that. today in fresno in spirit we are all part of the sikh community as we mourn these tragic incidences.
every american citizen, regardless of race, creed, or gender, has the right to live free of fear and discrimination. i commend chief dire and the fresno city police department for work diligently to find the individual or individuals who killed them and for continuing to look for other individuals who are responsible for the attack. i continue to urge the f.b.i. and the u.s. attorney general's office to work as they have been in making this investigation inquiry resolve itself into solving these very sad crimes that we think were based on hate t truly an unfair and discriminatory situation that
occurred in the last two weeks. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from mississippi, mr. palazzo, for five minutes. mr. palazzo: mr. speaker, time and time again the president has violated the boundaries of executive power. he has refused to enforce our immigration laws. he has opened the borders to syrian migrants against the will of the american people. and he has even changed the provisions of his own disastrous health care bill. this week the administration once again thumbed its nose at congress and the american people by jeopardizing the gun rights of law-abiding citizens. mr. speaker, the american people are fed up. the american people continue to see the executive branch not only deciding which laws they choose to enforce, but change and interpreting the laws as they see fit. the white house has become judge, jury, and executioner in
clear violation of the principles upon which this nation was founded. today i am introducing a resolution to sensor president obama to serve as a clear rebuke and condemnation of the unconstitutional actions of this president. this is a bold measure, but it is one that is necessary to preserve the very institution that we are all honored to serve, the united states congress. the constitution requires that the president shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. this president has failed to do so on numerous occasions. the constitution also requires the president to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the united states. the president has failed to do so. not only is the president trying to do our job, but he has failed to do his. his announced actions on gun control is just the latest example of blatant executive overreach by the president. congress must fight back.
i want to make it very clear, this is not about president obama. this is about the actions of a president who has encroached too far on the powers of congress. under the constitution, congress is an equal branch of government and should be treated as such. we cannot roll over on every executive overreach. we cannot wait to fight next time. we cannot wait for the next president. because it's not about this president or the next president. it's not about politics. it's about preserving the power of the legislative branch against this president and any future president who seeks to use egregious executive action t the expense of congress. the resolution to sensor the president has been used rarely. it's a way for congress to fight goingback against executive overreach. sense yurg the president will preserve for the historical and
legal record that this congress at this time disapproves of this president's executive overreach. if it's time congress fights back as an institution. i urge my colleagues to live up to their oath of office, both republican and democrat, to support this resolution to censure to president -- and put the executive branch on notice that vie lathe the separation of powers and using unconstitutional executive overreach will not be tolerated by members of the united states congress now or in the future. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton, for five minutes. mr. tipton: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to address an ongoing environmental review process within my district that i firmly believe represents yet another in a long line of abuses of private property rights by the federal government.
more specifically, the management agencies that oversee the majority of the land in the united states. the outcome of this process will likely set a disturbing precedent under underwhich the integrity of contracts with the federal government that they enter into with private property rights is undermined. the bureau of land management is currently reviewing 65 existing oil and gas leases issued in the white river national forest beginning in 1993. this retroactive review was prompted by 2007 decision on three of the leases by the intenor board of land appeals which the blm was founded to not formally adopt forest service environmental policy analysis utilized to make these decisions. basically what amounts to anard mrtive oversight. it should be emphasized their extensive reviews that did take place. that the b.l.m. played a significant role in that process. the agency argued as much during the land of appeals during the
review. the fault was simply that the b.l.m. needed to sign on the dotted line and the board expressly made this option available to remedy the problem. however, instead of adopting that commonsense approach, the b.l.m. succumbed to political pressure from the environmental extremists and determined to revisit every one of the leases issued since 1993. the new proposal from the b.l.m. deals with leases in one of two ways. it either imposes new significantly restrictive stipulation that is were not in place at the time of the original leases when they were acquired, or it outright revokes the leases. the federal government is acting nothing more than a highway robber in this case. robbing citizens and businesses of property that they have bought and paid for, telling us we sudden simply be grateful there is someone looking out for our greater interest. i highlight this particular process because should the b.l.m. follow through with certain actions of its proposed sanctions, it will set a precedent that not only for oil and gas development but for any
less committee who entering into a contract in good faith with federal agency may see their lease or permit threatened by -- with retroactive revocation or severely restricted based on any limsy pretext. many important industries rely on federal leases and permits, including livestock grazesing, cree creation and renewable energy. no business can operate if its license to do so no longer enjoys protections against arbitrary cancellations depending on the current occupant of the white house. numerous stakeholders and local governments recognize that the b.l.m.'s final decision would have impacts far beyond those of specific leases in question. undertook efforts to draft detailed and substantive feedback to the agency. this is a very laborous and time consuming process. yet the b.l.m. provided only the bear minimum public comment during this period and required by law.
the agency's scheduled comment period overlapped with thanksgiving, christmas, and the new year holidays. it also overlapse in other environmental review comment period for the well-known plateau. which involves many of the same stakeholders and has been under review in some form since late 1990's. as such, several stakeholders and local governments with the support of several members of colorado's congressional gel delegation requested for a modest extension of the comment period. these requests are in recognition of the technical issues of this. when there are similar issues under simultaneous review. despite this, the requests this this instance were dismissed out of hand. one can only conclude that the b.l.m. is afraid of the scrutiny that could result from them aeffectuating a government taking property. property rights of rectifying an administrative error over 20
years ago. it's abundantly clear that the b.l.m. intends to ramrod through something by canceling or altering leases to the point as to make them economically unviable. this is unfortunately in line with the disturbing trend of federal agency abuses to private property rights, whether it's the forest service's repeated attempts to acquire o forcibly property rights with regards to water or to classify every ditch and puddle as water of the united states. to further insert itself into the everyday lives of ordinary hardworking americans. property rights and integrity of contracts are at the very foundation of our economic system. yet, too often federal agencies casually cast these important considerations aside. if the b.l.m. is competent that it is making the right decision and is willing to defend it, then they should have no problem providing additional time for the public and other interested stakeholders to be able to comment on the proposed
actions in the white river -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. tipton: thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. costello, for five minutes. mr. speaker, i rise to call on this administration to keep intact all existing sanctions on the world's leading stays sponsor of terrorism, iran. sanctions must remain in closer scrutiny and more accountable by this administration on iran's continuing illicit activities must occur. it is imperative for peace, security and stability in the middle east and across the globe that we do this. iran's conduct over the past few months and the lack of clear and exact leadership by this administration in response is cause for serious alarm. iran has not changed its tone and conduct since the signing of the deal. in fact, they've doubled down on their unwillingness to
comply -- not to comply with international agreements, and they've created more danger and instability in the process. here's a central point of why i'm speaking on the house floor here today. once we lift sanctions, we have even less leverage. so let's look at how iran has honored their commitments in the past few months and ask ourselves, do we anticipate iran will conduct itself in the months and years to come better or worse? on october 10, iran carried out a precision-guided ballistic missile test. this violates u.n. security council resolution 1929 and 2231. now, iran is prohibited from such testing under the deal. what do they do? they send weapons to bashar assad on russian cargo planes. this violates resolution 1747. they did that in october. on november 21, they carried out a medium-range ballistic missile test with capabilities
to carry a nuclear warhead. they can't do that either. last month they fired unguided rockets 1,500 yards from two u.s. vessels and just a few weeks ago, just last week, rather, they unveiled an underground missile depot that has the capability of holding a nuclear warhead. what has been the response of this administration? they notify us they'll respond with sanctions against iranian individuals and businesses linked to iran's ballistic missile program. what happened since they notified us of that? nothing. they've walked it back. here's my fear, mr. speaker. we're forecasting to iran they have carte blanche to do as they wish. and once we lift the sanctions, we can expect more of that. iran is not hong its commitments -- honoring its commitments so nor should we. we know the state department classifies the deal not as a treaty, not as an executive agreement. it's not even a signed document.
it's merely a political commitment and it's clear that iran is not acting in good faith to our political commitment. i ask that the president immediately void the deal and restore and/or continue all relevant sanctions on iran that have been or will be relaxed under the jcpos. and let's not concern ourselves if they voice outrage that we voided a -- avoided a political commitment on the basis they somehow honored the deal because, number one, they violated u.n. resolutions since the deal took -- was signed. they -- the iranian parliament refuses to ratify the deal, and the ayatollah forbids further negotiations with the u.s. the bottom line, mr. speaker, iran's u.n. violations clearly violate the spirit of our political commitments to them, their conduct threatens our national security, it threatens the security of our allies and it further erodes an already precarious and unstable
environment in the middle east. iran isn't honoring its commitments, so nor should we. let's keep the sanctions in place. do not lift them. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. westmoreland, for five minutes. mr. westmoreland: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i want to start my time by quoting directly the second amendment of our constitution. a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of the free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. aren't those beautiful and resounding words? as a man who likes to keep it simple, i appreciate the founding fathers not only for their foresight to protect the right to bear arms but also how
plain and simple that they made it. the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. unfortunately, i think our founding fathers spoke too plainly for certain people, certain presidents to understand. that president may have always reminded us that they taught constitutional law. sadly, i've yet to encounter someone who in that position may disregard the constitution so regularly. not only would that president trample on the second amendment , but he would also trample on article 1 which, you know, is the congress. in going through the congress to make laws. that president should have known that the regulations regarding buying guns must come from legislation, not by an
oral decree. that president tried to legislate in the senate several times, but his colleagues refused to do it even though there was a majority. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not in the majority in congress. then, i'm assuming that this administration is deciding to create their own regulations. the constitution be damned because sadly there are no checks and balances anymore. we know even congress passes a bill to repeal any type of order that any type of president may make would still have to go to that individual to have that bill signed. so what are the chances of putting together a bill that some congress may have seen in
inappropriate executive action and then send it to the person that created that inappropriate action and expect him to sign it? i think, mr. speaker, this is one of the things that has so disappointed the american people is that inability to have their representatives voice their complaints and do their legislative responsibility to an out-of-control government. , as the ek administration that's intent or group is intent on just disregarding the constitution, they become numb. the american people become number to these illegal actions. i think it's time we bring attention to some illegal actions that some presidents in the past, some presidents in
the future may create. i think it's time that we bring these actions to the attention of the american people and let them know what our founding fathers had intention to do originally, what they intended the constitution to mean, how it was interpreted by those very first legislators. president washington, the supreme court and others, that they took this document as a simple document very plainly written and read. but unfortunately we have had supreme courts, we've had presidents, we've had legislative bodies that have tried to take these simple, basic words and turn them into something that they could use for their benefit to try to change the way that this world works and how our citizens
apply the laws that they make. and so, mr. speaker, we are going to try to do as much as we can in the near future to try to bring to the attention of the american people and the world, because i think our constitution has been a great cornerstone for this world and for any country that wanted to have a republic, a democracy and a people-driven form of government and to really feel that coat of liberty wrap around them. i think our constitution is that. so i think it's time for us, not only to make the citizens aware, but to make this whole world aware of what is going on and what we're going to do to stop it. mr. speaker, with that i yield back to the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today.
voted to repeal, the 40th time i've done it in the house. because of the senate, it will actually get to the president's desk. host: 62 is the number i hear. what is the significance? make the case that this vote is different. guest: this is the one that counts because we told people -- i have elected in 2010. we told people the first thing we would do is get a vote to repeal obama care and we did that. the very first vote we had was to repeal obamacare, but because of the democrat controlled in the senate and because the senate moves slowly, the senate never took up a repeal bill. it was only when we are able to budgetinto reconciliation of the senate was able to take up a repeal bill. this is the one that counts and will go to the desk.
host: even know he will most likely veto it. guest: we knew that when we ran it. people know that what barack obama and the white house, we will always have obamacare, he would never not veto the bill. to know thatple republicans would stand up and present the other side of the story. go back in 2009 when we were discussing it as a nation. there was not that much debate, it was a general debate about what we should do about health care. there was not much about the specific bill. we go back to nancy pelosi's statement that you have to pass it in order to read it. i hope now that we send it to the desk, he will set up and say i'm vetoing it and here's why and we can have that debate we did not have. once again,st:
republicans cannot contain their -- they are wasting time on a radical bill that will never become law as to celebrate the 62nd vote on dismantling the affordable care act. where as theys -- wasted their time on a radical bill that did become law back in 2009. host: that is all you will say on that? guest: was there a specific question? we never had the debate. in that statement, there is no defense of the merits, no response to the difficulties that people are facing. i'm on obamacare and i can't get service. i cannot get health care. coverage, there is no response to that in a statement. we wantwhat we want, the president to come out and say here is why it is a good idea so we can say here is why we think it is not. that debate needs to take place.
my fear is that the president will avoid that, that what you saw last week about guns, is desk it is an attempt not to have that debate. host: if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8002 for independents. e-mail us if you like at email@example.com. why wasn'tought up this fight made last year when it came to putting it at attaching it to the actual budget? with a -- was that a better situation? attaching a fan of things you must pass legislation, but the senate did not do that. the only way to get this to the president's desk was by using this arcane set of rules called budget reconciliation. a very narrow area of law that does not need 60 votes in the
senate. invented -- if it had been attached to the spending bill, the threshold was no longer 50, it would've been 60 and there are not 60 republicans in the senate. caller, they mentioned what is the alternative? guest: one of the biggest frustrations that rank-and-file republicans have with the ryanous leadership, paul aside, back to john boehner and eric cantor running the place. 2012d been promised since that we would offer our alternative ideas. they are there, you can find them on the website. we have a comprehensive obamacare replacement bill. for some reason, previous leadership was afraid to bring it up. i'm glad the leadership is gone and that new leadership is in place and i hope that we will now have the nerve and guts to
go on the stand and say not only did we not like obamacare, but here is our idea on how to fix things. if we don't do that, we will of failed the country and our party. host: what are some of those alternative ideas? guest: the examples i give people are to look at the insurance systems that work. life insurance works, auto insurance works. the different types of insurance. there is competition for it. showing ads on tv different auto companies selling insurance. you don't see that for health insurance because most the -- most of the time, your employer picks it for you. insurance. other if your car -- if your window gets broken on your car, you sit down and you do a calculation. this to make the
repair or can make a claim against my insurance. we don't do that with health care. you walked in and the doctor says you need an mri and you get one. it is the only thing we buy is that someone else pays for. it is a broken system. you can look to examples in other areas of insurance. the cost of life insurance and home insurance have come -- have gone down in the last 10 years. look at the list of things you can improve, there are models elsewhere and insurance areas. we talk about selling across state lines to promote competition. host: republican from south carolina joining us, first call from florida, democrat line. are you there? let's try another one, chicago illinois, republican. is, why doquestion
-- why do republicans let the democrats say that -- republicans are trying to limit women's access to health care when they are trying to limit their access to murdering babies? guest: the short answer is we can't dictate what they say. they have freedom of speech. we have to let them say it. the better question is, why don't we respond and we do try. we made the case during the planned parenthood debate last year that we were trying to do move the money from planned parenthood to the federally qualified health care clinics which provide more services to more women in more places. they better serve the lower end of the economic spectrum, so we try to have that argument, but if the media won't drive that
out, we are left talk about it on facebook pages and twitter accounts. we agree, we try to make the case this was not about women's health care. we tried to make it clear that not simply taking money away from planned parenthood, but we were moving into places where it could better serve them and tell. it got lost in the wash. host: missouri, democrat line. yesterday, we had another republican on from the south and he was talking about gun control. i'm not going to talk about that, but what he said was that the republican congress could pass some gun control law if the president would work with them. to the president come and work with you on repealing this help care law or did you just decide that you could do it without him?
every time we have a discussion , the health care on c-span only thing ever discussed is the cost of health care insurance. the cost of discuss what health care actually does and how these medical corporations running all the hospitals and medical groups are just flat overcharging everybody for everything they do? i recently went to the hospital three times, three different days, did not stay overnight. it was just for testing. waso-pay after medicare $8,000. this was just for testing. kennedy's hell
medical groups and doctors groups and hospitals get by with this get by with this overcharging? it's not the insurance companies. it is the credit groups, the hospitals, and the doctors. host: thank you for your comments. guest: back to the original point about the president still do notus, i know who my white house liaison is. i was reading a book about the founding of the nation, the first thing resident washington did after he was sworn in was right a letter to congress. written by john adams in congress at the time. he actually wrote a letter to himself. a wonderful history piece, but the example is there. the president works with congress when it works props -- properly. this president has not worked with congress to time not sure he knows how to. left to our own devices, we
would much rather deal with health care than reining in the second amendment, which is what he wants to do. to your point in more seriousness, are the things that house could do? yes, the house passed an amendment three years ago to increase federal funding for the background check system. we discovered at the time there was a difficulty between the states. they were not communicating well with each other. as beingre adjudicated mentally dangerous in north north carolina was not sharing their information with south carolina. you could move to south carolina , buy a gun, and it would not turn up in a background system. that was broken. i voted for that as many republicans did. in the democratic controlled senate. had the president gotten involved, we may have been able to fix that piece of the puzzle.
those types of things do not get done. beforeheard the rhetoric about corporations and so forth. let me respond to john. just because it is built $8,000, it does not mean he was overcharged. i have no idea what services were performed or the complexity. deal forght be a great the level of health care he got. people think they are entitled to health care as a matter of law and by virtue of being here, they are entitled to a level of health care. i think that is a dangerous position to take. every time we say we are entitled to something, we have to recognize the flipside of the equation. beautiful things about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, is it does not require anyone to do anything other than leave you alone. someone else is
obligated to pay for it for you and i am not willing to go there. is patty froml connecticut, independent line. go ahead. caller: thank you. please do not cut me off. republican to say a columnist, andriy mccarthy, says the republicans do this all the time. they take their time doing a bill right up to the limit so they can say, we tried. the store away. paul ryan gave the store away. they try to placate the republicans. mitch mcconnell, paul ryan is losing the republican party. that is why donald trump is making headway. it. sick and tired of the health care thing is a ploy. it is doing nothing, just like
everything else you do. nothing. i was a republican. no longer. thank you. with her more than she probably realizes. the donald trump phenomenon is real. is leading in south carolina. i have been in 568's -- five states supporting rand paul for president. the scent of why trump is doing so well, it is real. there is a broad swath of not only republican party but well, whot voters as are simply angry with the parties.ment in both that is why you see bernie sanders doing so well on the democrat side. that anger is real and well-founded. people in the democrat party have done a lousy job following through with their promises and we have done a lousy job under delivering. we had a thing called the pledge
to america and we did a terrible job of following through with those promises. anyone who wants to really uphold would pull out that document. the anger is real. -- i do notissue see that. don't judge him as the omnibus. still hads will to me the cold dead hand of john weiner. ominousot do an spending bill. paul by 2015. the deck is clear now and he is done with all the stuff, cleaning up after the previous
leadership in our party. you can judge by what happens now. do the same thing republicans in that building are doing. give paul a chance. he has got one year. have a 2017, and we will chance to judge by its own actions and not cleaning up. i think it was a promise kept. people will decry it as being meaningless and doing nothing, but we knew that would be the case in 2010 when we ran. we knew the president would veto the bill. everyone knows that. it should not be surprised -- a surprise to anybody. but we made a promise and kept a promise and are trying to drive a debate here the country is divided on how we should deal with health care. we are trying to drive that debate. as a result of what happened yesterday in the house and the senate, by sending the bill to
the president, health care becomes a focal point in the debate. i have not heard it yet. it is all about isis and who is angry and who hates everybody more. let's have a debate on how to fix the health-care system for. we should have in 2008. we didn't appear the democrats passed the health care system. we need to have it now. republicans are trying to drive that debate. louis, maryland, republican line. i will stick to the health care bill. health care is not working. [indiscernible] you have [indiscernible] not what you're getting in health care.
issuethe is you -- the is, if you want medicare and medicaid expansion, just say you want to do so and you want to charge someone else [indiscernible] know it isfunny to ironic the same process used to pass health care more, when the democrats have [indiscernible] -- i just wanted to point that out. fact that you have rights, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, someone else has to pay for it. you have to pay for it. the numbers do not lie. double digits, almost 20% in health care costs just this year. it will continue to grow. medicare and medicaid expansion. what happens in the next two years -- host: you put a lot out there
for our guest let him respond. guest: i got this question a lot about us using the same process to repeal obamacare as the senate and house used in 2010 to pass it. that is partially correct, just to clarify for the folks who watch the show who are much more educated on this. correct.artially the first pieces of obamacare were passed when the democrats at 60 votes in the senate. the first part of it went through with 60 votes and the rest of it went through budget reconciliation. it is one of the reasons we were not able to repeal all of obamacare. technically what we did yesterday repeals most of obamacare but not all of it. that is probably getting more detail than most people care about. think it is better to say, if you want to be intellectually
honest, it is working for some people but not for other people. all we have done is move the group people in the country who are uninsured. it used to be if you are very poor and did not qualify for medicaid, you cannot afford health care. obamacare fix that by allowing heavy subsidies. if you are one step above that, middle-class, if you were a one income household with a couple of kids, you used to be able to afford health care because your employer would provide it, but now you cannot. a lot of folks used to have health insurance, who cannot get it now. lost in all of the debate, is that we are talking about the cost of health insurance, not health care. the $19 a month insurance
coverage people can now have carries with it several thousand dollars deductible. people can afford the health insurance but cannot afford to have health care. i was talking to one of the doctors in my district. they said one obamacare was first on the scene, they were ande -- eager to take pimco -- people in. and getld now get in their annual physicals. doctors were happy with the reimbursement rates. if you were sick and needed something and now your deductible kicked >> see all of this conversation at c-span.org. we'll take you live now over to the capitol to hear from speaker paul ryan. the speaker: for me 2016 is going on offense. it's about starting to get the country back on track. and how better to start the year on offense than putting a
ll to repeal obamacare and defund planned parenthood on the president's desk? how long have we been at this, five years? getting past the senate democrats has always been the issue, and finally we correct the code. in 2014 we won the senate. in 2015 we passed balanced budgets in the house and senate. that gave us reconciliation, a tool we can use once a year, and we're doing it with this. this is now -- is someone named obama going to sign a bill repealing obamacare? of course now. but we have now demonstrated if we elect a reason president we can use this same path to repeal obamacare without 60 votes in the senate. this is critical. that's how we will move toward replacing this law with a truly patient-centered health care system. so this is where we truly kick off making this year the year of ideas. my basic premise for taking
this job is making sure that we offer the country a clear choice for the direction that we want to lead. we need to give the people the respect that they deserve, and the information that they need to make an informed decision. this means putting together a bowled -- bold pro-growth agenda and means putting together quickly. and i know you want to know the who, what, the when and where and why of this agenda. we are not going to do this top down. this is going to be developed through a bottom-up collaborative process with all of our members contributing to this process. and these aren't going to be things we're going to be able to get done this year. not with this president. this will require a new president. mandate to do big things, if we want the mandate from our fellow americans to fix our country's problems and get us back on the right track, we're going to have to offer a real agenda to
the country and we're going to do that soon. this is what 2016 is all about for me, go big on ideas, get the country back on track, restore a confident america. i really look forward to getting started on this process. >> mr. speaker, on t.p.p., major business groups have come out this week endorsing the deal but they have specific complaints that members of congress raised on pharmaceuticals and other things. are you pressing the administration to maybe do some other side agreements with other t.p.p. countries or appeasing other members of congress like yourself? the speaker: go talk to orrin hatch. he'll give you his concerns. there are concerns with the contents of t.p.p. not many had a chance to wade through it all. a lot of people are still reserving judgment. the agreement has enormous potential but we got to get it right and we're going to take the time to get it right. >> mr. speaker, with the
decline in the chinese stock market and also some of their military activity in the south china sea, just how concerned are you about china and what this means to the world? the speaker: i would say this shows we need a strong navy and not have a president lowering our ship count to pre-world war i levels. that means we need to have a strong military and strong navy and a real foreign policy which we do not have. i would simply say the best thing we can do for a strong america and to have a peaceful globe, especially in the south and east china seas is to have a strong military and strong navy. a healthy economy. >> do you see that as a deterrent? the speaker: having a strong navy, i sure do, absolutely. >> now that leader pelosi said there will be sanctions on the house floor regarding north korea. can you elaborate that? the speaker: i'll let the majority leader release the schedule on the vote that's going to occur. so kevin, i think, i don't know if he'll announce it but will be announcing it very shortly.
>> what does it look like? the speaker: i'll let the majority release it. >> but it's going to happen? the speaker: yes. >> tonight the president is having a town hall on gun control, gun violence. he continually says he's not going to take away americans' guns, their second amendment rights. wondering if you believe him? the speaker: i don't think the president -- i think he's been pretty hostile to the second amendment all along. i don't think the president has a lot of respect for the second amendment. and guess what is one of the most important things that we can do as citizens collectively to protect ourselves from some possible terrorist attack? exercising our second amendment rights. and so i think it would be nice to have as much attention paid to defeating isis, dealing with homegrown jihadists, making sure that terrorists do not infiltrate our immigration system, whether it's refugees or something else. that is what has got americans really concerned about the safety for their families, and that's something i think we should not be distracted away
from focusing on but focused on. >> do you think he's trying to take away americans' guns? the speaker: i think he's frustrating the second amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. >> mr. speaker, can you explain to us how you selected nicky haley from south carolina to be the -- the speaker: i think nicky embodies a great republican leader. she's unified her state. she's reformed government. she's focused on growth and opportunity and she's got a great personal story. so i think nicky haley is the perfect kind of reform kind of governor that embodies what new republicans look like. >> do you think she would make a good vice president? the speaker: do you think i'm going to weigh into that? gee, i'm not touching that stuff. >> i spoke to several of your members who say they want more than just an agenda. they want to vote on a tax plan, on obamacare replacement, on entitlement reform and they want not just see bills but vote on the floor. is that the kind of option at this point? the speaker: everything is an
option because what we'll do is make the decision collectively in our conference. that's the purpose of having a bottom-up process in congress. when you decentralize power in this place, you have a group decide these things. that's why i want all of our members participating in this process to decide how best to advance ideas. but let me just say one thing. do you think barack obama is going to sign a bill repealing obamacare? do you think he wants to lower tax rates for all families and individuals and small businesses? no, he doesn't. so we know we're going to have to go to the american people with a mandate, with an agenda so that they can choose. that's what this is all about. look, the stakes could never be higher. i mean, we have a weak economy and the world is on fire, and where is america? where is the prosperity that we ought to be having? where is the upper mobility? where is the ladder climbing people out of poverty? it doesn't exist right now. and so we as republicans who
don't like the direction the country is headed -- and look at every public opinion poll. most americans agree the country is not headed in the right direction. so we as the alternative party owe the country an alternative and that's what we're going to do. so the details about how this alternative gets rolled out is not nearly as important as offering people a real clear and compelling choice in 2016 so they can choose, they can choose what kind of america they want to have tomorrow. >> mr. speaker, a couple years ago at the conference, you had brought up the exat the died precision -- the speaker: you like talking about this, don't you, john? >> you said at that point you wanted to work with president obama. the speaker: yeah. that was more than a couple years ago. >> more than a couple years ago. you're still on budget and now you're speaker. now you can do some of these things. and i'm curious if that is something that you want to -- the speaker: i still support the -- i passed the bill i
think twice, perhaps, when i was budget chair or even before i was budget chair. so do i support the idea of a legislative constitutional line-item veto which is expedited rescission? of course i do. i'd actually refer you, since we have a committee-driven system here, i'd refer you to tom price and the budget committee. how about somebody i haven't picked? >> before christmas you said you would be supportive of an aumf vote. what's going on there? the speaker: so the majority leader and chairman royce, the foreign affairs committee, is gathering ideas and having listening sessions with our members about whether and how we can do an aumf on isis. >> have you had any conversations about the possibility or the possible contingency of a brokered republican convention? the speaker: no, not even thinking about that. how about back there? >> mr. speaker, i'm wondering if you've been able to arrange the president for the private meeting he's invited you to --
the speaker: say that again? >> the president has invited you to have a private meeting, the sort of sitdown or dinner, i wonder if that doesn't happen before tuesday, what would you say to the president and what would you like him to address in his final state of the union address to congress? the speaker: yeah. so it's not going to happen before tuesday. that's not on the schedule. we're -- i don't know when it is actually. we're trying to get it scheduled. my mood will basically depend how well sunday goes for the packers. to be candid for you. >> are you going to the game? the speaker: no. i'll be at home watching it in my basement with my family and with some venison chili and some chees heads. i would tell him in his state of the union -- cheese heads. i would tell him in his state of the union, the health care is bad, we shouldn't have done dodd-frank. i want to clear out tax rates,
crony capitalism and restore the tution -- constitution to its rightful place. something tells me he will not say that. have a good one. >> thanks. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> of course, yesterday the house passed that reconciliation bill that would repeal major portions of the affordable care act and defund planned parenthood. that will go to the white house. enrollment ceremony in the capitol. 4:30 eastern. that will be over on c-span2. the house returning in about 15 minutes. we'll have live coverage here. this afternoon the house will take up debate, legislation, rather, dealing with lawsuits against the federal government that could result in new regulations. that bill requires the federal government to provide public notice when it begins negotiations in those lawsuits. also today, the house begins debate on a bill that would set limits on class action lawsuits for people exposed to asbestos. house is expected to continue work on that bill tomorrow. it all gets under way at noon eastern live here on c-span.
up until then, the briefing from just a short while ago from democratic leader nancy pelosi. ms. pelosi: good morning. to some of you, welcome back. some of you we've seen earlier in the week. one issue or another. hope you had a restorative and enjoyable holiday. first, as we come back, it was very moving and historic, really, to see the president opening the new year on strong commens executive actions to address the epidemic of gun violence in america. as you know, americans overwhelmingly support action to reduce daily tragedy of gun violence in our communities. the president has clear authority to toughen the application and enforcement of
existing laws to save lives and, again, no substitute for some additional congressional action, which we're asking for a vote for. it's necessary because 30,000 americans are being killed by guns each year. many more, and probably three times that, close to 100,000 gun injuries. tomorrow marks the five-year anniversary of our own -- since our own colleague gabby giffords and 18 others were shot outside a supermarket in tucson. it was really a joy to see gabby there five years later. five years that she has devoted to reducing combun violence in our country. -- gun violence in our country. she and her husband mark. with all of that and families that were gathered there and the hope that the president instilled in them and the path that he provided to reduce gun violence in our country was
really almost sad to see speaker ryan and congressional republicans say the president's action reduces action -- dismisses actions to reduce gun violence as a distraction. the speaker said what the president did was a distraction. i wish he could have been there at the white house because it wasn't a distraction for the families of children who were there, the families there of children killed at sandy hook and newtown. it wasn't there -- it isn't a distraction, the pinckney family was there, reverend pinckney from south carolina. it wasn't a distraction for the many other families who were there. in fact, it was their central focus, and the president's actions gave them hope, gave them something to mobilize around. as they say, enough is enough, and we will not stop until the job is done. we want a vote in congress on
the bipartisan peter king-mike thompson legislation to close loopholes. 20 years ago when we first passed the brady bill, how many of you were shopping on the internet? well, many of you weren't even shopping. how many of you were shopping on the internet? now 20 years later, many people are shopping on the internet and some people are buying guns there in and that loophole needs to be -- there and that loophole needs to be closed. republican congress even refuses to keep guns out of the hands of suspects on the f.b.i.'s terrorist watch list. today republicans will vote for the 10th time to block action to close the loophole that allows suspected terrorists to buy guns in the u.s. you can be on the terrorist -- f.b.i. terrorist watch list, go into a store and 90% of the time leave with the gun of your choice. that's a loophole that should
be closed. the republicans refuse to do so. we must build on what the president did and pass the king-thompson bipartisan legislation. i truly believe that it would pass the house if the speaker gave us the opportunity to vote on it. meanwhile, instead, as we discussed yesterday, some of us, for their first act of 2016, republicans decided to renew their attack on women's health with yesterday's reconciliation bill. republicans once again tried to take family planning and life-saving preventive care away from millions of american women. it is the house g.o.p.'s 11th vote to attack women's health in the 114th congress. alone, n alone, -- 2013 plained parenthood's -- planned
parenthood saw more than 370,000 -- giving more than 370,000 pap tests, more than 450,000 breast exams. this republican bill to defund planned parenthood is an insult to the intelligence and judgment of women. it's a waste of time and taxpayer dollars. the president will veto the bill. democrats will sustain the president's veto. hardworking americans would have hoped that the first act of the republican congress would put forth -- first legislation that would put forth would be something about job creation, about growth, about good-paying jobs for the american people, not grandstanding on women's most intimate decisions. republicans should -- new year's resolution would be to quit their anti-women health obsession for the new year. global matters, as you know, north korea has reported a nuclear -- in fact, they reported a hydrogen test this
week and that's deeply concerning. while the initial analysis that north korea has -- is that north korea has overstated the nature of the test, but these reckless actions threaten the security of the region and the world. this irresponsible act by north korea violates long-standing u.n. security council resolutions on nuclear weapons activities. those resolutions include , other c missiles initiatives but speaking -- just speaking specifically to this, it's in violation of the u.n. resolution. we understand that republican leadership plans to move a bill strengthening u.s. sanctions on north korea. that will have strong bipartisan support. my understanding is it may even be brought up under suspension as early as next week. democrats in the committee will support the legislation -- do support the legislation, and it has been in the works for a
while. this has not just materialized since monday night's test. it is ready to go and we will support it. any questions? no. chad. are you chad's person here? is he going to ask about the bengals or something like that? >> no, the bengals beat the tigers. didn't talk about that. ms. pelosi: i talked about the warriors. >> we don't have a basketball team. ms. pelosi: what do you got? >> i know you're optimistic about electoral propects for your party in the house here. there is one thought if donald trump would be the nominee that drastically increases his chances, what you do you think trump is the -- ms. pelosi: so you want to talk politics in the dome of the capitol? for a small percentage, after we discuss policy and why the election is important, yes, i'm
confident about in this presidential year the clear contrast between democrats and republicans, the message of trickle down, which republicans ess spouse tax breaks for the wealthy and special interests and perhaps it will trickle down or growing out from the middle, recognize we're a consumer economy, grow our economy in that way. i think that contrast is a stark one, and the american people will identify with our democratic initiatives under that framework. we have great candidates. the optimism that i have springs from the enthusiasm of people who are stepping forward to run. so we have the candidates. we have under mr. clyburn's leadership, mobilization, outreach to register and reconnect with people as to why it's important that they vote. and the leadership of our chairman, mr. lujan, who is
24/7 is an understatement of the time he puts in and high he has with hich our colleagues. and the -- >> how much does it make a difference that trump is the nominee? ms. pelosi: so if i say we want trump, then that means we think that enhances our prospects so that might reduce his support. i don't really get involved in the republican nomination for president. you know that. i barely get involved in the democratic nomination for president. but whoever they choose, we will be ready to make the contrast. because it's not just about personalities. although that counts in a presidential. it's about policy. and it's about how the american people identify with someone who identifies with their aspirations, who understands them, who knows them. and so i wish them well in
their process whoever they nominate. we feel very confident that we will be able to defeat and to do so in a way that lets many more members in the house and senate and state legislatures across the country. >> ma'am leader, curiosity of your -- madam leader, curiosity of your views. canadian born ted cruz -- do you think this is -- ms. pelosi: this is inside baseball to use one of chad's always sports analogies. inside baseball of the republican party. it's up to them to decide. i do think there is a distinction between john mccain being born to a family and serving our country in panama than someone born in another country. but, again, this is a constitutional issue that will be decided or not. in constitutional way, my opinion means nothing here.
>> are you prepared to say you're unsure? ms. pelosi: i haven't paid any attention to it. i'm more concerned of the fact that the republicans in congress think that -- trying to stop gun violence in our country is a distraction, that their first legislative act is to defund planned parenthood. that's really what my focus is, not where ted cruz was born. >> since we're talking politics, progressive groups, some are calling for debbie wasserman schultz to step down as the head of the d.n.c. she's been in open battles with one of your democratic members. does she still have your confidence? ms. pelosi: yes. >> can you elaborate, why does she have your confidence? ms. pelosi: i don't share the concerns that others have put forth. i have been vocal in saying i thought we should have had more debates. that isn't about her leadership. it's just about a decision that was made by those who make those decisions. but debbie wasserman schultz is a very valued member of the house of representatives, from
the standpoint of policy. she knows her issues. she came here as an experienced egislator from the florida legislature. she is -- she has all the stamina and enthusiasm for the job that she has and i believe she has the confidence of the president and will -- of the -- will of the number northeast our party. >> now the d.n.c. is being sued by one of your presidential candidates, do you she she's been good -- ms. pelosi: i am not aware of that. i am not aware of a lawsuit. i'm sorry. i'm just not paying that much attention to that aspect of it. yes, sir. devaling currency is markets. the bill that passed the house, do you think that will address this adequately and is that about the most congress will do in this congress? ms. pelosi: i don't support the
customs bill. i think that it started out as a reasonable place that we could support, but when they added other initial -- you know, the story is the customs bill. the customs bill is where terrible amendments to the trade promotion act, the fast track, where terrible amendments went there. they didn't put these amendments on the fast track bill because they knew they'd lose democratic votes. >> watch all of this online at c-span.org. the u.s. house gaveling in momentarily for legislative work this afternoon. they'll debate legislation dealing with lawsuits against the federal government that could result in new regulations. the bill requires the government to provide public notice when it begins negotiations in those lawsuits. also, a bill setting limits on class action lawsuits and they'll continue work on that bill into tomorrow. also, as part of the consideration of the rule this afternoon, our capitol hill producer tweets, house to hold override vote of president
obama's expected health care reveal, planned parenthood defunding bill, veto by january 25. it's included in the lawsuit bill rule on the floor today. let's go live to the house here on c-span. er. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of mercy, we give you thanks for giving us another day. as the energy and tensions of the second session gather may there be peace among the members of the people's house. grant that all might be confident in the mission they have been given and buoyed by the spirit of our ancestors who built our republic through many trials and contentious debates. may all strive with noble sincerity for the betterment of our nation. many centuries ago you blessed